As far back as 2005, Microsoft executives knew that confusing hardware requirements for the Windows Vista Capable program might get them in trouble. But they did it anyway--over the objection of PC makers--at the behest of Intel, according to e-mails released as part of a class-action lawsuit pending against Microsoft. In early 2006, Intel's Renee James, vice president and general manager of Intel's software and solutions group, was able to prevail on Microsoft's Will Poole to change the proposed requirements for Microsoft's proposed "Vista Ready" marketing program to include an older integrated graphics chipset that couldn't run Vista's Aero interface. At the time, Intel was worried that it wouldn't be able to ship the more advanced 945 chispet, which was capable of running Aero, in step with Microsoft's proposed schedule for the introduction of the marketing upgrade plan. This led to the creation of the "Vista Capable" logo, which is the reason Microsoft is now in court, facing a class-action lawsuit on the part of PC owners who bought so-called Vista Capable machines in late 2006 only to find those machines could only run Vista Basic, which doesn't feature the Aero interface. The potential for confusion was well-understood both outside the company, as noted here in this CNET News.com story from March 2006, and within the company, as multiple e-mail threads reveal. You can read more about it here. http://www.news.com/8301-13579_3-98...

As I said before, they're capable of running Vista Basic, so perfectly Vista capable. people should stop bitching, do their research and open their eyes. Microsoft aren't doing anything wrong. Why serve in heaven when you can reign in hell?

Yeah, but it will be blamed somehow on Microsoft, because they approved it. I don't know why Micrsoft got pressured by Intel in the first place. MS should have told Intel you guys are the 3rd largest semi-conductor in the world, behind IBM and SUN, don't tell me you can't come up with a IGP chip that mat not be ready in 14 months time to take full advantage of Vista's software, because rather you do have it or not, we are going foward. This was pure lazyness on Intels part.

Exactly. . Why serve in heaven when you can reign in hell?

For once i agree with the defenders of M$. HOwever I would still throw in that OS makers bossing around hardware makers was one of the main reasons Apple and then IBM failed in the 1980's. Microsoft still needs to tread carefully with these guys. "People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought, which they avoid" - Soren Kierkegaard.